boot server executables vs. execable executables

What are the advantages and disadvantages to loading servers via the
boot server and executing them after the system has booted (such as
via inittab)? I understand that there are certain servers which have
to be loaded via boot.lst in order for the system to boot properly.
Is it the case that only the absolute necessary servers should be
loaded that way?

Along these lines it would seem that there should be some sort of
naming convention to differentiate a server that is linked against
crt0srv.o and one linked against crt0.o. That way it is obvious where
something got loaded, and you don't try to put the wrong thing in
boot.lst and create an unbootable system.

A couple of examples. If you want to create a bootable floppy, you
need to put the fd server in boot.lst, but you have to have a fd
server executable that's linked against crt0srv.o. The default
fd in /vsta/boot is not linked against crt0srv.o, so can't be put
in boot.lst. On the other hand, for a boot floppy there is no reason
to put wd in boot.lst since it can be started in inittab, or after
the system is booted. But, since /vsta/boot/wd is linked against
crt0srv.o, I don't believe it can be effectively started after the
system has booted.

Perhaps everything in /vsta/boot should be linked against crt0srv.o
and copies of the servers that are linked against crt0.o should be
in /vsta/bin/srv or /vsta/srv/bin or some other location. That would
help differentiate between the two types of executables.

Just some observations.

Brett McCoy, UNIX Systems Administrator
Computing and Network Services, Kansas State University, Manhattan KS 66506
vox: (913) 532-4908 / fax: (913) 532-5914 / e-mail: brtmac@ksu.ksu.edu
PGP Key available on request
Received on Mon Dec 19 12:22:22 1994